TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant C. S. Aggarwal with Mr Prakash Kumar for the Respondent JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) - 1. These three appeals under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act') are directed against the order dated 21.09.2007 in ITA Nos. 2236, 2237 and 2238/Del/2005 pertaining to the assessment years 1999-2000, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002, respectively. The assessee had filed returns for the aforesaid years which were processed under Section 143 (1) of the said Act. A survey operation was conducted under Section 133A of the said Act at the business premises of the assessee on 07.03.2002. At the time of survey it was found that the business premises wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Being aggrieved by the assessment orders, the assessee preferred appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who upheld the action of re-opening of the assessment as well as the additions made by the Assessing Officer. The assessee filed appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer was not justified in re-opening the assessments. Consequently, the Tribunal did not consider it necessary to go into the merits with regard to the additions made by the Assessing Officer in respect of each of the three years in question. 4. The Tribunal noted that Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. Examining the reasons recorded under Section 148 (2) of the said Act, we are unable to agree with the learned counsel for the appellant/ revenue that the Assessing Officer had reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment in respect of the years in question. The reasons recorded, first of all, indicate that the survey was conducted under Section 133 A in the business premises of the assessee on 07.03.2002, which falls within the financial year 2001-2002 relating to the assessment year 2002-2003. The years in question in the present appeals are assessment years 1999-2000, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002. It is obvious that the survey was not conducted in the years in question. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respect of the first floor was going on. It is further noted that the assessee had not booked any expenses on account of renovation of the said business premises. On the basis of these facts, the Assessing Officer noted that he was satisfied that investments made in the renovation work had escaped assessment. Here too, we note that the survey was conducted on 07.03.2002, which falls in the year subsequent to the three years in question in these appeals. The fact that the renovation expenses had not been booked in that year, i.e., financial year ending on 31.03.2002 does not by itself indicate that renovation work had been carried on in the earlier three years and, if so, the expenses in respect of the same had not been booked. The conclusio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
